Anirudh Shah vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5930 Chatt

                                                                   NAFR

      HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                        MCRC No. 4037 of 2022

   Rana Singh S/o Mithlesh Singh Aged About 22 Years R/o Jadavpur,
   Police Station Jadavpur, District : Gopalganj, Bihar

                                                              --- Applicant

                                  Versus

  State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Ambikapur,, District :
  Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

                                                        ---- Non-applicant

                        MCRC No. 4309 of 2022

1. Paramjit Mahto S/o Chandradev Mahto Aged About 46 Years R/o
   Jadavpur, Police Station Jadavpur, District Gopalganj Bihar., District :
   Gopalganj, Bihar

2. Prabhu Kumar Singh S/o Kashi Aged About 19 Years R/o Jadavpur,
   Police Station Jadavpur, District Gopalganj Bihar., District :
   Gopalganj, Bihar

3. Tabrez Alam S/o Fateh Alam Aged About 19 Years R/o Jadavpur,
   Police Station Jadavpur, District Gopalganj Bihar.

4. Sobha Sundar S/o Mandar Harijan Aged About 28 Years R/o Village
   Bargaon , Police Station Karsaguda, District Navrang Odisa.

5. Suraj Sahni S/o Lalbahadur Sahni Aged About 20 Years R/o Village
   Hirapakar, Mehandiya , Naharpar, Police Station Jadavpur, District
   Goal Ganj Bihar.

                                                            ---- Applicants

                                  Versus

  State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. , Police Station Ambikapur,
  District Surguja Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur),
  Chhattisgarh

                                                        ---- Non-applicant

                        MCRC No. 4318 of 2022

   Anirudh Shah S/o Manejar Shah Aged About 34 Years R/o Jadavpur,
   Police Station - Jadavpur, District - Gopalganj ( Bihar)

                                                             ---- Applicant

                                  Versus
         State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station -
        Ambikapur, District - Surguja , Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja
        (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

                                                                                   ---- Non-applicant

                                      MCRC No. 4531 of 2022

    1. Sanzed Alam S/o Kalamuddin Aged About 22 Years R/o Jadavpur,
       Police Station- Jadavpur, District- Gopalganj (Bihar)

    2. Bittu Kumar (Wrongly Mention As Bittu Sahani In Ord Sheet) S/o
       Bishun Prasad Soni Aged About 19 Years R/o Jadavpur, Police
       Station- Jadavpur, District- Gopalganj (Bihar).

                                                                                         ---- Applicants

                                                    Versus

        State Of Chhattisgarh Through S. H. O. Police Station- Ambikapur,
        District- Surguja Chhattisgarh.

                                                                                   ---- Non-applicant

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Applicants Shri Anurag Singh, Advocate (MCRC No.4037/2022).

Shri Sanjay Pathak, Advocate (MCRC Nos.4309/2022, 4318/2022 and 4531/2022) For State Shri Vinod Tekam, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

Order on Board

22/09/2022

1. Since all these applications are arising out of the same crime number, therefore, they are being disposed of by common order.

2. The applicants have preferred these first bail applications under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.210/2022 registered at Police Station Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20 (B) and 29 of of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (for short 'NDPS Act').

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on a secrete information received the Police apprehended accused Prabhu Kumar Singh, Bitu Kumar, Paramjit Mahto, Sanzed Alam, Tabrez Alam and Anirudha Shah from Ambikapur bus stand holding bags in their hands containing the contraband which are mentioned herein below :-

      Prabhu Kumar Singh                  11.200 Kgs.

      Bitu Kumar                          12.800 Kgs.

      Paramjit Mahto                      11.600 Kgs.

      Sanzed Alam                         12.600 Kgs.

      Tabrez Alam                         11.380 Kgs.

      Anirudha Shah                       14.900 Kgs.

4. Thereafter their memorandum statements were recorded and it was informed that accused Rana Singh gave them some money of Rs.3,000/- to bring the contraband from Jagdalpur and take it to Gopalganj Bihar, however, in mid way in Ambikapur Bus Stand the accused persons were apprehended. It is also the case of prosecution that accused Shobha Sunder and Suraj Sahni who happens to be auto drivers also part of the conspiracy to transport the contraband with the accused to Gopalganj Bihar.

5. Counsel for the applicant Anurag Singh submits that name of the applicant Rana Singh came into light on the basis of memorandum statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, which is not admissible in the evidence. He further relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, [2021] 4 SCC 1 . Therefore, there is no legal evidence admissible against the present applicant to connect him in said crime. He submits that applicant is in jail since March 2022.

6. Shri Sanjay Pathak, counsel for the applicants Paramjit Mahto, Prabhu Kumar Singh, Tabrez Alam, Anirudh Shah, Sanzed Alam and Bittu Kumar submits that the contraband seized from the possession of the present applicants is not in the commercial quantity rather it is an intermediate quantity and therefore they imposed minimum sentence prescribed under Section 20-B of the NDPS Act and they have already remained for more than six months. So far as applicants Shobha Sunder and Suraj Sahni were said to be auto drivers. He submits that there was neither seizure of any auto nor seizure of mobile contained the phone number of the present applicant, therefore, there is no evidence against these two applicants. They have also remained in jail for considerable period of about six months.

7. On the other hand counsel for the State submits that on a secret information received the applicants were apprehended namely Paramjit Mahto, Prabhu Kumar Singh, Tabrez Alam, Anirudh Shah, Sanzed Alam and Bittu Kumar and from their possession the aforesaid quantity of contraband was recovered. In their memorandum statement name of Rana Singh was revealed and therefore Rana Singh was apprehended. Since the driver also involved in offence by hatching a conspiracy to transport and to help in transporting the contraband to Gopalganj Bihar, therefore, it cannot be said that all of the accused are not involved in the offence and Section 29 of the NDPS Act clearly demonstrate that the person who has held the conspiracy will be punished with the same nature of offence for which the other accused are charged.

8. At this stage Shri Tekam, learned counsel for the State submits that the applicants are not resident of State of Chhattisgarh, therefore possibility of their absconding cannot be ruled out and therefore in the event of bail being granted a local surety may be asked for and they may be restrained from leaving the territory State of Chhattisgarh till the trial is completed, for which counsel for the applicants have no objection and submitted that they are ready and willing to furnish local surety and will not leave the territory State of Chhattisgarh without prior permission of the trial Court/Special Court.

9. Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions, so far as the allegation of criminal conspiracy and name of Rana Singh appears in the investigation is based upon the memorandum recorded by the other co-accused and the name of two accused persons said to have helped the other co-accused in transporting the contraband. Apart from the fact that there was seizure of mobile but not belonging to them and there was no seizure of auto it cannot be prima facie said that they have played active role in the commission of crime.

10. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, quantity of contraband seized, in view of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh (supra) and period of detention, I am inclined to grant bail to these applicants.

11.In view of the above, the applications are allowed. The applicants are directed to be released on bail and executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lac only) each with one local surety each to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court with Aadhar card and photos of the applicants, they shall be released on bail, on following conditions :-

(i) they shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such fact to the Court,

(ii) they shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and

(iii) they shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial,

12. It is made clear that these observations are only for the purposes of deciding the bail applications. The trial Court will decide the case on its own merits without being influenced by any observation made herein-above. It is also made clear that the applicants shall not leave the territory State of Chhattisgarh without the prior permission of the trial Court / Special Court.

13. It is also made clear that the State is at liberty to move an application regarding cancellation of bail of the applicants in the event of applicants' violating any of the above stated conditions.

Sd/-

Sachin Singh Rajput Judge

Kamde